Srimagesh v. State Of Kerala

Court
Kerala High Court
Case number
Crl.MC/8143/2022
Date of judgment
13 Dec 2022
Bench
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
Petitioner
SRIMAGESH
Respondent
STATE OF KERALA
CNR
KLHC010781122022

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 8143 OF 2022 CC 90/2020 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,THRISSUR PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:

1 SRIMAGESH AGED 44 YEARS S/O SELVARAJ, 39A, OLD GST ROAD, NEW LAKE, CHENGALPET DISTRICT, KANCHIPURAM DISTRICT( OLD).

TAMIL NADU, PIN 603001.

2 SELVARAJ AGED 70 YEARS SELVARAJ, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O SELVARAJ, 39A, OLD GST ROAD, NEW LAKE, CHENGALPET DISTRICT, KANCHIPURAM DISTRICT( OLD).

TAMIL NADU, PIN 603001, PIN - 603001 3 GEETHA LAKSHMY AGED 65 YEARS W/O SELVARAJ, 39A, OLD GST ROAD, NEW LAKE, CHENGALPET DISTRICT, KANCHIPURAM DISTRICT( OLD).

TAMIL NADU, PIN: 603001, PIN - 603001 4 SUBASHANI AGED 40 YEARS D/O SELVARAJ, 39A, OLD GST ROAD, NEW LAKE, CHENGALPET DISTRICT, KANCHIPURAM DISTRICT( OLD).

TAMIL NADU, PIN: 603001., PIN - 603001

Crl.M.C.No.8143/2022 -:2:- BY ADVS.A.C.VENUGOPAL VIDHYA. A.C RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 DR, BHAVNA.T.JISHNU AGED 40 YEARS D/O DR. T. JISHNU. HOUSE NO:16 PEACE COTTAGE, ROSE GARDENS COLONY, AYYANTHOLE VILLAGE, THIRUVAMBADI P.O.

THRISSUR, KERALA DISTRICT, PIN:680022 BY ADV Muhammed Hashim A SRI SANGEETHA RAJ-PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.8143/2022 -:3:- O R D E R Dated this the 13th day of December, 2022 This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure 2 Final Report in C.C.No.90/2020 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur on the ground of settlement between the parties.

2.

The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 4. The 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant.

3.

The offence alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Section 498A of IPC.

4.

The respondent No.2 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.

5.

I have heard Sri.A.C.Venugopal, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.A.Muhammed Hashim, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri.Sangeetha Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor.

6.

The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit sworn in by the respondent No.2 would show that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the

Crl.M.C.No.8143/2022 -:4:- criminal proceedings further. The learned Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement of the de facto complainant was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was amicably settled.

7.

The Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)], Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] has held that the High Court by invoking S.482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable offence where the parties have settled the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case or to ensure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.

8.

The dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure 2. The offence in question does not fall within the category of offences

Crl.M.C.No.8143/2022 -:5:- prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra).

For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further.

Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure 2 Final Report in C.C.No.90/2020 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur hereby stands quashed.

sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp

Crl.M.C.No.8143/2022 -:6:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8143/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 THE TRUE COPY OF FIR DATED 18.11.2019 IN CRIME NO. 809/2019 OF THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION Annexure2 THE TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 809/2019 IN C.C.NO. 90/2020 BEFORE HON'BLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR Annexure3 AFFIDAVIT OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT WHO IS RESPONDENT 2, REGARDING THE COMPROMISE ENTERED WITH THE ACCUSED

Original PDF on the eCourts judgment service →

Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.